While I understand the views about this shooting everything must be taken into account. That totality of circumstances starts not with the initial
traffic stop but the moment Finnicum arrived in the state and at the scene of this mess. That includes being interviewed on tv while being armed while
stating he would not be going to jail.

I agree that "everything" must be taken into account... but where we differ is that the "totality of circumstances" doesn't begin with anything LaVoy
did or didn't do; it begins with those federal authorities, agencies and agents who created this mess to begin with -- long before LaVoy was even part
of the picture.

Those comments played directly into the way law enforcement planned his apprehension.

Of course, we saw how those comments were twisted and tweaked and twerked and contorted to make LaVoy the greatest threat to mankind that ever walked
the earth... or maybe he was just the greatest threat to Federal authorities.

Finnicum, at ANY point of HIS choosing, could have ended the situation peacefully and at several points prior to his being shot and killed had
ample opportunity to do so.

And, likewise, the authorities could have handled the situation peacefully. AND had ample opportunity to do so at several points prior to and
INCLUDING the ambush in a deadman's roadblock of their own deliberate and willful creation.

A loss of life is always the last outcome anyone wants however the actions of just one side cant be viewed while ignoring the actions of the
other parties involved.

In this case, I strongly disagree. I believe with all my heart that loss of life is exactly what someone wanted, and they created exactly the
situation that would "justify" the cold blooded killing of everyone in that vehicle.

ETA: Generally speaking, I consider this case a perfect example of how the current rules of engagement (so to speak) between LE and the public
literally gives a free pass to LEOs to kill anyone and everyone they so choose with impunity. While 99 out of 100 -- perhaps even 999 out of 1,000 --
officers will do everything within their power and experience to minimize threats for everyone, there will be those who will take advantage of this
lack of accountability and oversight to kill innocent people for their own sadistic pleasure. And even one is too many.

As for the agent lying he has already been indited and rightfully so. However his actions, discharging his weapon and given totality of
circumstances, was legally justified.

Legally? I would say under color of law.

My point though is the lie he told had no bearing on the incident or its outcome.

Well, technically, yes... he told the lie AFTER the deed was done. So the lie itself did not play a role in the events that day. But what he lied
about sure as hell did!

It is like the issue with General Flynn. He was charged with lying to the FBI over his contact with Russia. In the end we find that he broke no
laws talking to Russia so there was no need to lie. Flynn's lie has absolutely no bearing on the Trump-Russia mess.

I appreciate the analogy, and I understand how you might believe this based on your perspective. But I disagree. While Flynn's contact with Russia
had no bearing on Trump's alleged collusion with Russia, the premature shots fired by this agent did indeed have everything to do with LaVoy's
subsequent actions based on his knowledge that his vehicle was under fire, and that everyone in that vehicle was in danger.

Aside from the criminal charges the agent faced he is done with law enforcement. No prosecuting attorney will bring a case that he is involved
in. He is toxic to any case he touches, whether its as lead agent or as simple as holding evidence and handing it off to an evidence
officer.

Thank Heaven for small wonders!

I know people have strong feelings with this case and thats perfectly fine. I am only trying to explain the side no one really wants to look at
or understand (not necessarily you as we have had this conversation in other threads).

And we should have strong feelings -- about this case and any/every case involving life and limb. Especially at the hands of those entrusted by the
public to protect life and limb. (And that's wasn't LaVoy...)

In general grand jury proceedings are restricted and are generally not released to the public.

Is it customary for grand jury proceedings to ever be released to the public? After trial, if not before?

Awww... thanks. It sure was a doozy! Three days of absolute misery... then three more days taking care of Hubby and clean the germs out of the house
while also trying to get my own strength back. So glad it's behind me!!!

Thank you all for your comments... and for fighting the good fight! We certainly have our work cut out for us. And not by accident!

But having thought about this for a few days, it occurs to me that those directing this narrative have given even more thought to how to achieve their
agenda, and we're going to have to fight even smarter if we have any hope of beating them. And since divide-and-conquer is the name of their game, we
must refuse to play that game... and that means that we're going to have to do the absolute last thing "they" want us to do: We must give our LEOs --
and their lives -- the same respect and sanctity that they want LEOs to deny us.

I've been looking into various aspects of today's police brutality and use of excessive force, and one of these days I'll write a thread on it, but
what I've found is bone-chilling. LEOs are being conditioned and trained to kill in order to "protect" themselves from both real and imaginary
threats. It is being drilled into their heads (and hearts and souls) in the most despicable and reprehensible manner. AND in such a way that anyone
and everyone IS ALSO A THREAT who dares to challenge or even question an LEOs "right" to kill because he/she is "afraid" that person "might" be a
threat. Not only are WE a threat if we dare disagree, at this point, any officer who refuses to act accordingly is also branded a threat to his
fellow officers... LEOs today are literally put in the position of choosing between protecting the innocent and protecting his fellow officers. As
frustrating and horrifying as it is for us to see, I can't imagine how frustrating and horrifying it could be for any LEO who dares to walk that
oh-so-thin blue line...

We're pretty darn fortunate to have LEOs and other legal eagle types who are ready, willing and able to explain the intricacies of the law, and how
the law is used against us. We're even more fortunate to have a few that will do so in a respectful and courteous manner... though not all of course!
They deserve our respect and courtesy right back. They didn't make the rules, they can't change the rules, and they are being played (and
victimized) as well as the rest of us.

We can attack the deeds and the logic and reasoning and especially the laws without attacking the LEOs personally. I know it's frustrating and
maddening and sometimes downright horrifying. But we have to do better if we have any hope of turning the tables. We have to show just as much
respect for their lives as we demand they show for ours. It's the only way because ALL LIVES MATTER!!!

It seems to me that the "Kill List" is a very clear indication of intent in this case. It show malice aforethought to have pictures of the Bundys
with targets on their heads displayed in the office.

Perhaps with the shake-ups in the DOJ we will see movement on this, at least another review with the new information that has come out. Indeed, we DO
need to look at the entire picture, including the "Kill List" and the false reports filed by the alphabet agencies. A token firing of someone isn't
justice.

It seems to me that the "Kill List" is a very clear indication of intent in this case.

I don't know how it can be taken as anything else. That's not a joke. Not even a bad joke. There's absolutely nothing funny about that. And it
wasn't even a "death" list, which could be technically (or kinda/sorta) considered a "neutral" term... a noun... just sumpin' that happened
donchaknow.... But nope. Kill is a verb. Kill takes an action. A violent action. A deliberate action.

And we know damn well if the Bundys had anything even remotely close to such a thing that it would be used against them in court. Mens Rhea is
the term I believe.

Perhaps with the shake-ups in the DOJ we will see movement on this, at least another review with the new information that has come out.
Indeed, we DO need to look at the entire picture, including the "Kill List" and the false reports filed by the alphabet agencies. A token firing of
someone isn't justice.

God knows I hope and pray so... but I don't expect much from Sessions. Sessions -- and everyone in DC -- knows what's going on -- and what has been
going on for far too long. We know where too many "reviews" and "investigations" and "committees" go... nowhere.

On the other hand, this case ties into so much other corruption and investigations that are currently ongoing that it's possible Team Trump is
addressing it, but within the context of the greater fight to "drain the swamp." Like Uranium One. I want to believe. But I need to see something
more substantial before I do believe it. Because you're right -- a token firing of someone who is now basically unemployable anyway ain't
justice.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.